The role of literary criticism is clearly defined in literary theory: its purpose is to reveal the meaning and beauty, but also to assess the values of a book. Newspaper book reviews are a special form of literary criticism written for the daily or weekly press. They are intended for the widest audience and have the task of demonstrating masterful skills of analysis, interpretation and clear evaluation of works within a limited word count. In order to remain a true mediator between the book and the readers, newspaper reviews are based on caring and loving books and the written word. It was precisely newspaper reviews that contributed to the development of literary criticism as an area of study.

Lately, we have been reading about the poor state of literary criticism (compare the texts “Književna kritika u kritičnom stanju” [“The Critical State of Literary Criticism”] from Nezavisne novine, 24 June 2007, with the newest text in Glas Srspke from 26 September 2007, “Kao jaje jajetu” [“Like Two Peas in a Pod”]. There are virtually identical problems in neighbouring states: A seminar on newspaper reviews was held in May 2004 in Serbia, while in 2005, in Croatia, the literary magazine Tema

The poor state of literary criticism in the daily and weekly press is not just a problem in Bosnia and Herzegovina and its neighbouring countries. At the beginning of May this year, the New York Times warned about the disappearance of book reviews from the press, as well as the elimination of the position of editors and desks for culture sections. The most dramatic measures, among many, were suffered by the Times Book Review from Los Angeles: although it was known as one of the best in the USA, this supplement is no longer a separate Sunday section, but has been merged into another section (The Ideas). Due to all of the above, the National Book Critics Circle launched a campaign for preserving literary criticism in the printed media.

Why is criticism falling through the cracks, and why such neglect? The answers might be found in a valuable study, badly needed to understand today’s dominance of the lack of good taste. The study is a book by Milivoje Solar Predavanja o lošem ukusu, odbrana estetičkog uma [Lectures on Bad Taste, in Defence of the Aesthetic Mind] (Zagreb, Politička kultura, 2004) that talks about the causes and consequences of the general loss of the power to judge, the absence of evaluation (of literary works), and consequently the absence of taste as such. Due to the constant publication of exclusively affirmative offers, trends (current advertising) annuls or disorients personal taste, which is then left to momentary decisions and suggestions without any footing. The crisis of taste and the crisis of interpretation are mutually conditioned, because judging something must also involve interpretation. Solar points out that good taste is, in principle, critical: it is determined by the power to contest and a footing in aesthetic judgements. The imposition of the visual as the most powerful means of indirect persuasion (television, film, and computers) has contributed to a distortion and senselessness of communication, whereby nothing is said because nothing is thought. A literacy survey of students in Croatia conducted two years after the publication of Solar’s book confirms this fact as it alarmingly points out that children do not read fiction nearly enough and therefore lack speaking and writing abilities (net.hr./kultura – published on 19 October 2006).

Uncritical Criticism

For the past few years, nowhere except in Slobodna Bosna, can one come across a clearly denominated and marked heading: “book review”. Regular book reviews are absent, but we do come across some type of texts about books. For example, in Nezavisne novine, there are sections such as “My Choice” or “The World of Books”, but these texts are dominated by a superficial impressionist panegyric criticism, without a clear evaluation or an exact assessment of the work. A critical review, essay or interpretation is practically unheard of.

In the BiH press, there are hardly ever any negative book reviews (occasionally in Slobodna Bosna), and even rarer are well argued reviews (such as V. Spahić’s review of Vječnik by Nedžad Ibrišimović “Šta se o Vječniku zna, a ne želi reći?” [“What is Known but Unspoken about Vječnik?”] published in the weekly BH Dani on 29 December 2006, No. 498/499, p. 65).

When discussing a book, a lot of space is, by some unwritten rule, used for absolutely irrelevant literary elements: the personality and life of the author; or the author’s dealings, or the publisher. Regardless of whether it is a book of prose, poetry or another genre, the formula of these so-called reviews is always the same: write extensively about the contents or cycles of the collection + copy parts of the book (ah, those quotes!) + insert lost of phrases + seal it all with praise. Even when column space is provided for a book review, the review is made invaluable by way of poor “production”, which exhibits almost no “skill”.

Chummy or Corrupt Criticism?

The absence of valid criticism has multiplied problems and created new ones that continue to grow to pathological proportions. Since these are not handled with focused attention, and adequate, effective measures are not undertaken, the consequences are increasingly tragic. In May 2005, in Sarajevo, the PEN centre of BiH organised a round table about the issue of “Is literary criticism chummy?”, but I think these are misnomers. Chummy or comradely criticism is written out of friendly consideration and an expectation of reciprocation. The matter is far more pervasive and the consequences much more serious, because what is at stake is corrupt criticism, a group of rooted individuals who combine their powers of monopoly and business discretion at the cost of excluding the public and accountability.

This mesh of corruption hides the key to the devaluation of literary awards (not only) in BiH. The best example of organising and awarding but failing to justify the award is the highly advertised as regional “Meša Selimović” award. Every year, this Tuzla based award is the site of scandals, which will be inevitable until some basic rules are clearly set down (see and compare texts published in the weeklies BH Dani on 14 September 2007, No. 535, p. 48-55, and Slobodna Bosna on 20 September 2007, No. 566, p. 64-66). This circle of corruption accounts partly for the loss of critical thinking, neglect of books and reading, and especially for the fractious, insolent and pathological patterns of behaviour of authors themselves. The newest text “Književnost u neredu” [“Literature in Disarray”] published in Nezavisne novine on 24 September this year is one in a line of many sorry indicators of how far things have gone amiss.

Advertising the Practice of Not Reading

Apart from the lack of a permanent and prudently dedicated space for newspaper book reviews, another phenomenon is an even better indicator of the monstrous distortion of criticism. Instead of opinions and evaluations, the most frequent manner of doing a book review, which is also the most dramatic indicator of the debasement of newspaper book reviews in the BiH press, is in the form of an advertisement. These ads are a common feature of the daily press, and they take up the smallest possible space in the worst column – by the margin of the page, which is visually symbolic of the true place of books today and the general attitude towards them. The ad usually contains the smallest possible image of the book cover and the shortest possible text about the book – one or two sentences usually copied (!) from the publisher’s press release. For example, in Nezavisne novine from 15 September this year, on page 24, at the very top is a large heading “CULTURE” on one side, and on the other with painfully smaller letters, there is a recommendation: “YOU MUST: read, see, listen,” the only sentence about the book Filmske vrste i rodovi [Film Genera and Species] by Nikica Gilić, copied from the publisher’s press release, just like the only printed sentence about Odbrojavanjeprofil.hr.
On top of that, the publishers of these books are omitted and there is no signature of the author/editor of this section. This is the perfect indicator of today’s position of culture, which is that of a sticker: gnawed at and largely swallowed up by empty advertising.

The weekly Start has a two-page spread honestly titled as the “Showcase” of music, books, films, even faces of artists. For the past few years, a similar practice is applied in the weekly Slobodna Bosna, in its section Time of Books, where apart from the frequent “copy” + “paste” procedure, there are also superlatives with no explanation and no signature of the section author(s).

Who is behind this plagiarising advertising, this incessant roll of the publishing assembly line, that even the editors of such sections fail to read, but are ever so ready to present us with a medley of titles? Are there any criteria based on which the books are chosen? Why are we being told that we must read these books? The key problem of this approach is advertising the practice of not reading.

Since by definition, advertising is supposed to include pointing out the good features of a product, and these ad sentences do nothing of the sort, we are, in fact, labouring under a twofold misconception: because of its reduced function of advertising and announcing, the ad itself has been distorted into a poster. These sentences usually do not explain why a book is important and why it is worth reading, or more precisely, they say nothing to recommend the book to the reader as a treasure or label it as trash. A particular type of these posters are recommendations by so-called public figures. But, again the key problem is diverting attention from the credibility of the person’s taste to the public figure, whose recommendations often lack appropriately explained judgements. The visual disproportion also suggests an inverted focus of attention: the photographs of these figures are twice as large as the photographs of the books or music albums (see for example the Saturday issue of Dnevni Avaz, or the “Showcase” section of the weekly Start, which also contains a section called “Recommendations”).

The Role of Criticism

Criticism is not only a way to inform taste (reading), but also a way to inform opinions and dialogue. Dealing with criticism resembles raising children. If we lie to our children, telling them they did something well, or if we do not tell them exactly what it was they did well, and what it was they did badly, what kind of people are they going to grow up to be? Deceived and lied to, they will find it hard to handle the truth, they will be inflamed to an unbridled degree of vanity, egocentrism and narcissistic pathological deformations. Very soon, they will present themselves as products of proven value and established quality and thus make it as “brands”.

Criticism should be a bona fide act, uttered with the desire to come as close as possible to the ideal of beauty and perfection, art in the true sense of the word. That is why criticism can never be a pamphlet. If criticism is a mirror of books, entailing light and knowledge, the writers of that view and outlook should not have to hide. How do we expand cultural/literary wealth without true assessors of their value?

The consequences of this negative transformation of literary criticism as seen in the printed media are manifold. First of all, the gulf between the market/media and advertising and the real/true value of books is widened. Then, criticism inevitably loses out on its reputation and credibility, and consequently, its value and significance. Instead of facilitating the achievement of its ultimate goal (evaluation, understanding and enjoyment of books), corrupt literary criticism deceives and obscures the understanding of books.

The greatest responsibility resides with the editors of daily and weekly newspapers, who must support an honourable and responsible editorial policy for the culture section, with high, permanent and stable aesthetic and ethic criteria. Newspaper editors must be the defenders, not the defamers of culture; they cannot be indifferent about what they print. An additional problem is that experts are silent and, therefore, accomplices in the crumbling of cultural values. Since editors at publishing houses do not encounter strong external filters (in the form of critics), they too print all manner of texts.

The greatest danger is the following: if we do not perform a real turn-about, the role and importance of literary criticism will be completely neglected, or more precisely, it will be relegated to the cage of literary magazines, so the truth will remain available to the least number of people, a group unable to influence the public literary scene. And it will be hard for true literary treasures to become public treasures. What new books of domestic writers will teachers and librarians recommend to children, teenagers and adults? Why are the best sold authors at BiH book fairs domestic classics (as confirmed at the recent book fair in Banja Luka, and clearly described in the news item published in Nezavisne novine).

Perhaps because the domestic public does not trust newspaper “critics”? Or flat-rate bestseller lists. Due to a lack of trust, ordinary people stick to proven values and are becoming more and more distant from contemporary domestic literature. And the rift between what is lauded and what is truly laudable will be on the increase as long as bad taste is advocated, judgement devalued and empty advertising promoted. (double issue 4-5) was dedicated to this problem. That same year a collection of papers titled Croatian Literary Criticism was published. In it, various experts pointed out the problems and possible solutions to the crisis situation. By the end of this year, the regional periodical Sarajevo Notebooks will publish a series of articles on the problem of literary criticism in the former Yugoslav republics.In daily newspapers, the column space dedicated to books has been reduced, and cultural supplements have been omitted: both the Zagreb Jutarnji List and the Sarajevo Oslobođenje have been left without their weekly culture supplements (Bestseller, KUN).

Dnevni avaz does not have a culture desk, and often a single person writes about both books, and operas, and plays, and concerts, and exhibitions. There are rare examples in the region such as the Belgrade weekly NIN and the daily Politika that maintain the credibility of literary criticism by way of the knowledge and skill of academicians and their younger colleagues. [Countdown] by Tena Štivčić was both copied from the book and borrowed from the web site